Replies to the Questionnaire
<< Start < Prev 25/40 Next > End >>

Comments on the Formal consultation with Forum participants In accordance with
Paragraph 76 of the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society


Affiliation: Number Resource Organization (NRO)

Name: Paul Rendek

Responses:

1. To what extent has the IGF addressed the mandate set out for it in the Tunis Agenda?
The IGF has proven successful and a valuable tool for increasing
mutual understanding of Internet Governance among all stakeholders. It
marks the first time a platform has been made available for all
stakeholders to come together as equals to discuss and debate issues
related to Internet governance. The first three IGF events have
provided valuable opportunities for education, communication and
networking amongst participants, from which all have benefited. The
maturing processes of the IGF have allowed for successful open
dialogue and debates between stakeholders that had previously not
engaged with one another.

2. To what extent has the IGF embodied the WSIS principles?
The NRO is satisfied that the IGF has embodied the principles coming
out of the WSIS. The tenets of the Tunis Agenda are reflected through
the open and inclusive processes by which the IGF operates. The WSIS
and IGF have helped to clearly identify the many stakeholders involved
in Internet governance, as well as the important roles that each of
these stakeholders play in ensuring the continued success of the
Internet.

3. What has the impact of the IGF been in direct or indirect terms? Has it impacted you or your stakeholder group/institution/government? Has it acted as a catalyst for change?
The IGF has afforded the NRO an opportunity to expand existing
outreach activities and identify new opportunities for cooperating
with other stakeholder groups. Various technical bodies, including the
NRO, have used the IGF events to reach out and address much of the
confusion and misunderstanding that exists in the areas of IP
addressing, DNS and root servers. The multi-stakeholder dialogues
fostered by the IGF, promoting security, safety, equitable access and
continued development, have been of benefit to all who use the
Internet. Another positive impact has been the improved involvement of
government and other stakeholder in Regional Internet Registry (RIR)
policy development process.

4. How effective are IGF processes in addressing the tasks set out for it, including the functioning of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG), Secretariat and open consultations?
The NRO believes that the existing Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group
(or MAG) plays a vital role in ensuring the IGF achieves the goals set
forth in the Tunis Agenda and should continue as the primary guiding
body of the IGF. Setting up a group such as the MAG has been a
valuable learning experience for all involved, and should be seen the
first step of many in establishing an effective multi-stakeholder
dialogue. While the MAG has matured a great deal since its inception,
the NRO would like to see it continue to refine and streamline its
processes, as both the MAG members and stakeholder groups gain
experience.

5. Is it desirable to continue the IGF past its initial five-year mandate, and why/why not?
The NRO supports the IGF's continuance as a forum to facilitate
multi-stakeholder policy dialogue (as outlined in Paragraph 72 of the
Tunis Agenda). While much has been accomplished over the last three
years, we believe there is still significant work ahead for the IGF.
There remain barriers to be removed and issues to be addressed if the
ideal of multi-stakeholder policy dialogue laid out in the Tunis
Agenda is to be achieved. The NRO advocates continued IGF focus on
community issues, such as equal access and development, where
collaboration by all parties involved is vital to finding a positive
way forward.

6. If the continuation of the Forum is recommended, what improvements would you suggest in terms of its working methods, functioning and processes?
The NRO supports the evolutionary improvement of the IGF's content and
format. The IGF forum is a valuable resource in assisting participants
as they make decisions in their own respective organizations and
jurisdictions, but the IGF should no decision-making role of its own.

While continuing to rotate meetings geographically, the NRO would
suggest scheduling IGF events back-to-back with meetings of other
organizations that deal with related issues. Further development of
on-line discussions and remote participation in face-to-face meetings
should also be a prioritized as a means of encouraging wider
participation.

7. Do you have any other comments?
The NRO supports the IGF as a space to facilitate multi-stakeholder
discussion. The IGF must continue to stress the need for all
stakeholders to work together in ensuring the continued growth,
security, and stability of the Internet. That the Internet has grown
so quickly and proved so adaptable is a direct result of its many
stakeholders being able to contribute meaningfully to the dynamic
processes of Internet policy creation and discussion. Multistakeholder
engagement with the processes and structures of Internet governance,
as facilitated by the IGF, is vital to the ongoing growth and
innovation in the Internet community.
?chronoformname=FormalConsult032009View&respcnt=25?>

Top of Page

 
Joomla Professional Work

Latest News

Popular

Copyright © 2005-2010 Internet Governance Forum. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Level A conformance icon, W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0